Quote Originally Posted by Bob's World View Post
We are slipping into the same trap with unmanned aircraft and their missiles that we fell into with our bombers and guided munitions. Some news is best delivered in person. Short, violent raids with no post-op clamoring for glory will be less likely to produce the strategic downside, and probably be far more respected by those we target and thereby produce better results.
Very much so.

However, I suspect that three things get in the way and in order of effect they are: Political will to launch and cope with the fallout; The issue of US casualties and potential prisoners to be exploited; The turf battle over who goes, who transports them, who extracts them, who's in charge and who's the backup and thus who gets the glory pre, during AND post op.

There are answers to all those, some easy, some less so. However, I have no doubt that's where we need to go. That's where we should have gone after Korea had we not gotten entranced with the flawed Massive Retaliation and then overeacted in response in typically American fashion and created Flexible Response predicated on an even more badly flawed philosophy of "we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty." Catchy but extremely short sighted and no strategy at all. Wasn't even really a policy, in fact, just political blather which is still causing problems today -- it did give you guys a catchy motto, though.

Strategic Raids will do far more good than interfering in other nations -- cost less, also...

In the new thinking department, I was pushing that 20 years before Eagle Claw and the Marines were doing it long before even I was born. They started on 3 March 1776 or 27 April 1805 or 18 November 1824, criteria dependent.

One of the young LTCs I pushed it to long ago and who agreed later became the DCSOPS of the Army and later named the first issue I cited as the killer. You and I have both watched the third issue and the second is part but not all of the reason for the first. Simply, the Pols will ask for a guarantee that cannot be given. Unless, of course, someone gets really innovative...